As a policy, it's bullshit. But here are the relevant sources:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Never_trust_anyone_over_30#%22Don't_trust_anyone_over_30%22
ono
joined 2 years ago
*taking the piss
Didn't Steam give out stickers (or some other small reward) for submitting nominations, and allow people to nominate games they had never played? I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of the Starfield nominations were blind and/or shill votes.
This seems like a good candidate for a bookmarklet that would append the (site:...) parts to an existing DuckDuckGo search result URL. Then you could just do a normal search followed by clicking the bookmarklet.
It's simple: My SSD can only fit so many 100-300 GB games, while I already have hard drives with plenty of free space.
(Also, running Linux means that an SSD doesn't help game performance much anyway, outside of initial loading time.)
You can get a 2TB M.2 for around $100.
More like $150-200 if you want a good one.
If you’ve got the specs for new games, there’s no excuse.
What a very privileged perspective. I don't have much money, but most new games are playable on my existing hardware if I tune the graphics settings. I would rather spend what money have on things like food and heat. (Or if the basics are covered, then maybe a newish game.)
but you have no direct connection from this resource to harm you claim it causes?
The connection is very clear, because you can see what domains are on the list.
So you’re lumping this resource into a bucket with other resources that were malicious
You’re saying a dev using this list [...] needs to convert their FOSS use-case to yours?
[...] the argument I feel you’re making.
Please stop putting words in my mouth. As you seem to be arguing in bad faith, I'm done with this conversation.
You’re getting into very sketchy territory by saying a dev who is using a public GitHub repo to solve their problems needs to take it down
No, I don't believe I said any such thing. Since you mention it, though, I think taking this list down and removing the false positives before bringing it back up would be the responsible thing to do.
In the interest of specifics, can you point to where this specific list has done harm?
I know from personal experience and investigation (both as a user and on the admin side) that there are now many cases of privacy-focused email addresses being rejected, or even worse, accepted and then silently black-holed, due to the domains being inappropriately added to lists like this one. I don't know of a place where people report such cases so they can be documented in aggregate, but if I find one, I'll be sure to bookmark it in case your question comes up again in the future.
Signal gets some things right, but others wrong, such as phone numbers and centralized architecture. As such, it doesn't fit the "everybody wants to use" part.
Did your wife go on social media to pick a fight by stereotyping and publicly scolding a large community of people, and justify it with an obviously false claim? I hope not, but if so, then I wish you the best of luck working through that together.
That’s not what this specific list is for.
Yet it has a lot of legitimate domains, and has had them for years.
Regardless of whether the maintainer is malicious or just irresponsible, his list is doing harm.
Be the change, homie.
When someone claims two obviously different things are exactly the same, pointing out that the comparison is idiotic is not combative, homie.
Edit: More to the point, defending one's community by pointing out the idiocy of an attack is not combative.
You might not be paying for software in money but you’re going to pay for it, one way or another.
Indeed. As I hinted in my comment, and stated more clearly in another one.
You should just learn Chinese.
That's disingenuous. I wasn't complaining about English not serving me well, now was I?
Also, once again, mountains vs. molehills.
3
A beautiful, broken America: what I learned on a 2,800-mile bus ride from Detroit to LA
(www.theguardian.com)
This popped up on reddit when I clicked a web search result. Just what we've always wanted.
I've seen an argument that defederation would just hurt the fediverse, and that even an exploitative giant like Meta should therefore be welcomed.
I think that's like arguing that we should get rid of antitrust laws, which we have for good reason.